American needs good leadership at all levels of society!
Society is built by social structures that define and maintain the stability of a nation.
The first and foremost need at the most basic level of society is the family. The family is the first formative foundation of citizens. And good parenting meets the basic needs of the child on the emotional level. Without such emotional needs being met, all sorts of social ills transpire that damage society's health!
The next need for good leadership is education, where children, and young adults grow into their full potential. The successful student grows to benefit himself by meeting society's needs. Young adults that have found their personal intersts and values that define thier own purposes and what role they will play in society.
Govenmental leadership is another need for society to flourish. Good government does not oppress by overbearing demands, but allows liberty to be of ultimate value. Liberty to define one's life. Liberty to seek after one's values. And Liberty to make a "Life". Good leaders in government do not lord it over others, by seeking their own interest, but seek to serve the interests of the nation and not just those that have elected them into office, but all citizens.
All these social structures are necessary elements to develop the nation's interests, and help to further the nation's health, but without the emotional needs of the child being met, the nation will suffer the ills that America find in its society. Such ills are limiting to the nation's educational institutons and the government's need for good citizens. We must find a way back to value the child and the family. Otherwise, all the "fine educational institutions and government politicies will be for aught, because the nation's children will not be ready to take the helm of leadership for the future.
Showing posts with label social ills. Show all posts
Showing posts with label social ills. Show all posts
Sunday, February 13, 2011
Wednesday, February 9, 2011
The "Ideal": Is Never "the Real"
Our Founders understood that human nature is what it is, and this fact alone was what made for a great nation. Their structuring of our government was to put men under the rule of law, so that tyranny would not lead the nation, nor barbarianism undermine society's order. But, today, there seems to be another opinion about humans and it is the "ideal of alturism".
Alturism is defined as selfless concern for others. Idealists, whether religious or humanists believe that men can become alturistic, by habit formation. These believe that Aristotle's virtues meet Kant's categorical imperative. But, what does this mean practically in light of our Founders view?
Our Founders view was a realist view, as they understood that men were not to be trusted with power over others, or power within government that was not balanced. They did believe that humans were to be self-governing, that is, not by outside authority, but inside character. And that character is illustrated by the commitments that one values
Parents were to train their children through every means available so that upcoming citizens would understand the needs of their nation, as well as their personal values of choice in vocation. American youth can choose where they will go to college and what they will study. There has been no tracking in American education, as a whole.
Because the individual is valued because of liberty, the child is able to develop to his full potential, as well as his understanding of himself in personal interests. The blossoming young adult's identity becomes an ego strength that does not define thesmselves by group identification, or familial determinations, but personal values of choice. These adults can withstand the diverse responsibilities of adulthood.
In oppressive societies, there is an overintending authority that superintends the child's life, as well as the adult's. Ego development is not the goal of such governments, but a denial of indiviudality and liberty of choice, value and conscience. These forms of government believe that power is needed for social order to be maintained and their amibitions to be accomplished.
Unfortuately, our "free society" has also undermined the foundations that are needed for children to grow into independent adulthood. Our society is fraught with social ills of divorce, child negligence, poverty, drug and alcohol abuse, domestic abuse, and educational needs. These social ills affect the "ideals" that our Founders envisioned and inhibits societal flourishing. The problem becomes what to do about it.
Good government that allows liberty to develop is first and foremost, but the needs of the individual child is also important to value. Liberty cannot undermine society's need for stability, which social structures of marriage and family bring. We are in a crisis in America because the family is broken and there is no way to make it work. Many families are over-stressed by various commitments that are not easily dismissed. A father/mother is still responsible to their employer and must meet their demands. But, these demands also undermine family time and the child's need for a secure and safe place.
The needs of our society are not the "idealist" dreams and hopes, of happily ever afters, or in oppressive means of training citizens through outside authoritarianism, but real world problems and needs that aren't easily addressed by government or life in modern society.
Social ills should not undermine America's ideal of liberty, otherwise we will become pawns of a moralistic totaltalitarinism that would inhibit our very "way of life", in the name of the "common good" or "public interest"!
Alturism is defined as selfless concern for others. Idealists, whether religious or humanists believe that men can become alturistic, by habit formation. These believe that Aristotle's virtues meet Kant's categorical imperative. But, what does this mean practically in light of our Founders view?
Our Founders view was a realist view, as they understood that men were not to be trusted with power over others, or power within government that was not balanced. They did believe that humans were to be self-governing, that is, not by outside authority, but inside character. And that character is illustrated by the commitments that one values
Parents were to train their children through every means available so that upcoming citizens would understand the needs of their nation, as well as their personal values of choice in vocation. American youth can choose where they will go to college and what they will study. There has been no tracking in American education, as a whole.
Because the individual is valued because of liberty, the child is able to develop to his full potential, as well as his understanding of himself in personal interests. The blossoming young adult's identity becomes an ego strength that does not define thesmselves by group identification, or familial determinations, but personal values of choice. These adults can withstand the diverse responsibilities of adulthood.
In oppressive societies, there is an overintending authority that superintends the child's life, as well as the adult's. Ego development is not the goal of such governments, but a denial of indiviudality and liberty of choice, value and conscience. These forms of government believe that power is needed for social order to be maintained and their amibitions to be accomplished.
Unfortuately, our "free society" has also undermined the foundations that are needed for children to grow into independent adulthood. Our society is fraught with social ills of divorce, child negligence, poverty, drug and alcohol abuse, domestic abuse, and educational needs. These social ills affect the "ideals" that our Founders envisioned and inhibits societal flourishing. The problem becomes what to do about it.
Good government that allows liberty to develop is first and foremost, but the needs of the individual child is also important to value. Liberty cannot undermine society's need for stability, which social structures of marriage and family bring. We are in a crisis in America because the family is broken and there is no way to make it work. Many families are over-stressed by various commitments that are not easily dismissed. A father/mother is still responsible to their employer and must meet their demands. But, these demands also undermine family time and the child's need for a secure and safe place.
The needs of our society are not the "idealist" dreams and hopes, of happily ever afters, or in oppressive means of training citizens through outside authoritarianism, but real world problems and needs that aren't easily addressed by government or life in modern society.
Social ills should not undermine America's ideal of liberty, otherwise we will become pawns of a moralistic totaltalitarinism that would inhibit our very "way of life", in the name of the "common good" or "public interest"!
Saturday, November 14, 2009
Divorce
Humans are social animals, but they are also rational animals. If the social context leaves no room for reasonable "personhood", where compromise, negotiation and solutions are met, then inevitably, relationships are dissolved through divorce.
Although divorce is a personal relational term, the issue plays across other types of relationships, whether they be business contracts, treaties, or community rules. Sometimes "peace and goodwill" dissolves before personal desires and necessities.
I think the Christian community and liberalism, in general, is living in denial, when it comes to many of these situations. Divorce happens and the long-term implications are many. Those who have never experienced divorce in their families are clueless as to how this affects the whole family system. But, they may be attempting to "protect society" from the inevitability of divorce, or other social ills.
The Christian community has a "pie in the sky" attutitude where the stereotypical "1950's" family is the standard, while the social liberal has their "ideal" as "peace and goodwill" in a globalist context. How can people continue to believe in a "ideal reality"? This is absurd!
Conflict is inevitable in this world and reconcilliation is not possible in some cases, either because of the situations involved, or the parties' lack of desire for reconcilliation. People all have their reasons for divorce. A childish hope for the "ideal" will not bring solutions to the real world.
Dr. Chris Smith, the sociologist from Notre Dame alluded to the Church being a solution to these kinds of problems, when he suggested a kind of "family intervention". I wonder how he imagines this being a solution, when the Church is full of those who are ill-equipped to deal with the realities in life, either through their "idealistic mentality" or their lack of education in the psychological or sociological fields.
Social ills are the real world of social problems and they will not be resolved through spirituality. "Spirituality" separates the ideal from the real and life is lived in the real realities of social contexts, personal problems and irreconciable differences.
No Church or liberal agenda is going to eradicate the issue of divorce, but they might continue to stigmitize the issue and distance themselves from divorced people. And this would be the worst of all possible "sins".
Although divorce is a personal relational term, the issue plays across other types of relationships, whether they be business contracts, treaties, or community rules. Sometimes "peace and goodwill" dissolves before personal desires and necessities.
I think the Christian community and liberalism, in general, is living in denial, when it comes to many of these situations. Divorce happens and the long-term implications are many. Those who have never experienced divorce in their families are clueless as to how this affects the whole family system. But, they may be attempting to "protect society" from the inevitability of divorce, or other social ills.
The Christian community has a "pie in the sky" attutitude where the stereotypical "1950's" family is the standard, while the social liberal has their "ideal" as "peace and goodwill" in a globalist context. How can people continue to believe in a "ideal reality"? This is absurd!
Conflict is inevitable in this world and reconcilliation is not possible in some cases, either because of the situations involved, or the parties' lack of desire for reconcilliation. People all have their reasons for divorce. A childish hope for the "ideal" will not bring solutions to the real world.
Dr. Chris Smith, the sociologist from Notre Dame alluded to the Church being a solution to these kinds of problems, when he suggested a kind of "family intervention". I wonder how he imagines this being a solution, when the Church is full of those who are ill-equipped to deal with the realities in life, either through their "idealistic mentality" or their lack of education in the psychological or sociological fields.
Social ills are the real world of social problems and they will not be resolved through spirituality. "Spirituality" separates the ideal from the real and life is lived in the real realities of social contexts, personal problems and irreconciable differences.
No Church or liberal agenda is going to eradicate the issue of divorce, but they might continue to stigmitize the issue and distance themselves from divorced people. And this would be the worst of all possible "sins".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
